September 27, 2017

"... setting the stage for a worsening Republican civil war that could have profound effects on next year’s midterm elections and undermine Trump’s clout with his core voters," writes Robert Costa in The Washington Post.

The GOP primary victory by conservative firebrand Roy Moore over Sen. Luther Strange could also produce a stampede of Republican retirements in the coming months and an energized swarm of challengers. It marked yet another humiliation for the Washington-based Republican establishment, particularly Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), whose allies pumped millions of dollars into the race to prop up Strange and reassure his colleagues that they could survive the Trump era.

Moore’s win, however, also demonstrates the real political limitations of Trump, who endorsed “Big Luther” at McConnell’s urging and staged a rally for Strange in Huntsville, Ala., just days before the primary. The outcome is likely to further fray Trump’s ties to Republicans in Congress, many of whom now fear that even his endorsement cannot protect them from voter fury.

What if this thing that seems to be Trump is bigger than Trump — a wave he figured out how to ride for a little while, but from which he can fall and which will roll on without him? Or is the whole thing — whatever it is (anti-establishment fury?) — already played out? We can't have an endless string of characters like Trump and, now, Moore...

On the eve of the election, Moore, wearing a white cowboy hat and a black leather vest, pulled a handgun out of his pocket and flashed it at a rally....

... can we?

“It’s almost as if there is a compulsion in the party to nominate the most ‘out there’ candidate just to show you can, with no concern about what that means for the rest of the party,” [Charlie] Sykes said. “Republicans — and that means Trump, too — have unleashed something they can’t control.”

How many "out there" candidates can there be? How wild can you be before people won't trust you? It's hard to know in post-2016 America. We've got a taste for the bizarre and we don't trust the appearance of normality anymore.

For months, only three of them — Flake, Heller and Wicker — were widely seen as vulnerable to primary upsets. But in the wake of Alabama, GOP operatives are no longer ruling out an expanded map of targets for Bannon and his associates, such as former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, who stormed behind Moore’s candidacy to reassert her influence within the party.

The revenge of Sarah Palin. She really started it all, didn't she?

“What we’ve noticed is that Trump voters aren’t necessarily looking for Trump, they’re looking for candidates who are outsiders like Trump and will lean toward people with that sort of background,” said Robert Cahaly, a Republican pollster whose firm surveyed the Alabama race. “Strange seems establishment, he’s not seen as disruptive at all, so he was at a disadvantage.”

In that sense, Moore was the Trump candidate.

“The president went into Alabama because of loyalty and political necessity,” said Christopher Ruddy, the chief executive of Newsmax Media and Trump’s friend. “When he’s faced with this kind of situation in the future, he’ll support his friends but the question is how far he goes. He may be a little careful.”

One of Trump’s first choices will be how much to get behind Moore, who GOP leaders fear could be a burden to Republican candidates nationally. At Trump’s Huntsville rally Friday — when he conceded he “might have made a mistake” in backing the incumbent — Trump vowed to “be here campaigning like hell” for Moore if he won, while acknowledging his limitations.

Trump had already hedged his bet, and of course, Trump immediately readjusted to align with Moore and make Moore just another success for Trump:

Despite today's conventional wisdom spin, this isn't really a rebuke of Trump--he endorsed Strange, but his endorsement was tepid and to my knowledge he never attacked Moore. Moore, for his part, supports Trump, and his voters seem to as well. Alabama is Trump country.

Also, at least some of Moore's support may be due to voters not liking (a) that Strange was McConnel's guy and (b) the circumstances of Strange getting the Senate seat temporarily.

Moore seems like a nut, but nuts are currently popular, or at the very least, the base prefers them to anyone attached to the "establishment" (at least to the extent candidates are perceived as "establishment"--a connected career pol can re-brand himself as "anti-establishment" with ease, and we can expect some of that next year).

“It’s almost as if there is a compulsion in the party to nominate the most ‘out there’ candidate just to show you can, with no concern about what that means for the rest of the party,” [Charlie] Sykes said.

Ann said: "The revenge of Sarah Palin. She really started it all, didn't she?"

I totally think so -- been saying this for years. And when the DNC and the media systematically set out to destroy her in 2008, that was the spark that lit the current "populist" wave upon which Trump currently surfs.

There's that word "stunning" again. We are continually being "stunned" by some event we didn't predict.

There's a general election in December in Alabama to fill Jeff Sessions' open seat. Luther Strange would have easily won it; Moore's a little more wild and reckless, but will probably win it too. Doesn't have much to do with Trump.

What is very odd for me is that after being impeached as Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court Moore ran for numerous positions - both statewide and local - and never got more than, if I recall, about 25% of the primary vote. Again, these were GOP primaries where the hard ideologue types tend to dominate. I used to live just outside of Mobile and after his impeachment - which was supported by the vast majority of people polled - it seemed his career was over.

Moore is actually a very well read and smart man; he knows the Constitution and the law in great detail. But he's, frankly, an extremist who has no business holding power.

I wouldn't be surprised if he loses the general election. Although in these times anyone predicting anything is making a huge risk.

Maybe, maybe not. Trump is the momentum. Absent his being there, that atmosphere would have been less cackling, less energetic and Luther would have been out connecting more. With Trump it was bound not to work.

We've got a taste for the bizarre and we don't trust the appearance of normality anymore

It's less about the bizarre and more about supporting a candidate that demonstrates a possibility to fight back against virtue signaling and political correctness. Weaponized PC is killing GOPe candidates and maiming those that manage to hold office by crushing any possibility of producing policy. You could have had Mitt who is as milquetoast as they come but nobody's begging for him to come back.

Alabama is not really fucked up. It's a very nice place actually. The person who wrote about all of Moore's losses is correct. He's been removed from the SC twice. Well, I will be checking his web site for some good Bible lessons.

We're not looking for "outsiders" per se - we're looking for people who aren't afraid to stand up against the obvious problems that our nation is facing. Unfortunately, when push comes to shove, most of the "standard" politicians don't fall into that category. This results in having to go with "outsiders" in a lot of cases because there really is no other choice.

Of course you can. There are many deplorables just waiting to run for office and there are many deplorables that will vote for them because they hear all the dog whistles. Too bad this brand of populism was co-opted by racists, bigots and lunatics.

Heads up for Althousians: Roy is a circus prize fighter. And Bannon is his new manager. Anybody want to go a few rounds with him?

That is not a culture that sells well in New England and the upper mid-west. But it is the Jacksonian Democracy that DeToqueville marveled at. And it is Our Supremacy in action. All races are welcome into the game if they play by the rules, go to church twice a week and stay sober,except for the weekends.

The outcome is likely to further fray Trump’s ties to Republicans in Congress, many of whom now fear that even his endorsement cannot protect them from voter fury.

Won't somebody do something about those awful voters?

What if this thing that seems to be Trump is bigger than Trump — a wave he figured out how to ride for a little while, but from which he can fall and which will roll on without him?

Surely not. This is all just dumb racist rubes mesmerized by a carnival barker, and we can shove them back in their cages once the barker's off the scene.

“It’s almost as if there is a compulsion in the party to nominate the most ‘out there’ candidate just to show you can, with no concern about what that means for the rest of the party,” [Charlie] Sykes said.

It's almost as if voters #1 concern isn't...(bows head reverently and takes the knee) The Party...

It’s almost as if there is a compulsion in the party to nominate the most ‘out there’ candidate just to show you can, with no concern about what that means for the rest of the party

Actually, I have a lot of concern about what it means for the rest of the party. We are trying to realign the GOP to be far less concerned with what Washington and Wall Street and the National Chamber of Commerce wants them to do and focus their attention on helping the middle and working classes. Do something rather than shrug their shoulders, spout something about comparative advantage and creative destruction, and advise people to "learn coding" when jobs are shipped overseas and cheap labor is imported.

As for the gun thing, Moore's opposition tried to portray him as soft on the 2nd amendment. Which means they were desperate. I think the add that informed everyone of all the money he had made from government (that is, he was paid a salary for the role he was elected to, Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court) and that he and his wife had flown in a "Private Jet!" was actually funny.

SMG is correct that at one point everyone thought that Moore's career in politics was over. That he was too far right to win, even in Alabama. But then, suddenly, pizza parlor owners are being harassed for theoretically not catering gay weddings, photographers and others are being sued and some state governments are persecuting people for not being sufficiently supportive of gays, transgenderism is being feted in the public square and being pushed on young children. Football players are refusing to stand for the national anthem. College students are rioting in black masks trying to stop conservatives from speaking. Etc, etc, etc.

Trump is a symptom. If he fails to fulfill his promises he will be replaced by someone else. The Tea Party tried to communicate the unrest of the populace in a pilot manner. It was used to raise money, and then destroyed.

I think the primary problem with establishment politicians is that they see their job as managing an unruly populous so that they don't make too many waves. This was viable when you had a mass media that could impose a worldview because mass communications was controlled by a limited number of people and a politicians real constituents were the people who controlled those communications channels.

That world is now mostly gone and successful politicians are going to be the ones who are able to understand and operate in the new paradigm.

1.) It wasn't stunning. The polling pretty consistently showed that was the likely result, as did the on-the-ground reporting.2.) He was Trump's "chosen candidate" only in a very loose sense--it'd be more accurate to call him McConnell's chosen candidate and to write another story about how Trump's base hasn't reconciled with McConnell's GOP Establishment...but that wouldn't get a headline slamming Trump so it's "Trump's chosen candidate" despite the inaccuracy.3.) Add up the money GOP Establishment types spent go lose (by double digits) to a candidate like Moore and ask yourself if the Establishment is capable of getting the message. Then shake your head in sad resignation that they probably aren't, and brace yourself for their tax cut and amnesty pitches--coming soon!4.) Charlie Sykes wants what, again? Graceful losses where the GOP candidate does the nice thing and gets his ass kicked by Democrats and Media forces...but about whom we can say "at least he was a REAL conservative?" Look, who's being stubborn here? If you don't like the populism that the based of the Republican party is embracing but you refuse to compromise with those people (within your own party!) then why should I listen to your electoral strategies? I'm fully sympathetic to the assertion that the GOP voters who elected Trump & Moore are insufficiently conservative and are taking the party in a direction more-principled conservatives fear. Trump won, though. Those voters exist and insulting them doesn't make them go away. Clucking your tongue and using the same types of attacks the Dems use (those voters are racists, uneducated, etc) doesn't make the voters disappear. Work out a compromise, change their minds, or leave the party if your principles preclude you working with those voters. As much as NeverTrumpers want to believe all of this is just a bad dream and the voters are just caught up in a cult of personality centering around Trump himself, this appears instead to be a real change that may be long lasting. Accept that reality and react accordingly--if you refuse to do so at least have the decency to shut the fuck up. Them Dem-sounding whining and attacks against the people that are (or should be!) your base is tiresome.

This was another no-lose for the dotard. If the establishment RINO wins, he owes Trump and will support MAGA. If Moore wins, he already supports MAGA and establishment can't say Trump was undermining them.

As for Roy's career being over, he is very much like Genny Churchill's boy who was totally hated by the Tory establishment in England in the 1930s. They would never allow him back into leadership. Winston was viciously hated for spilling the beans on the Tory Establishment and his rude style of saying the truth in all the wrong places. Political Correctness was the rule then too, and courage to govern with reality was absolutely hated.

Then May, 1940 happened. And his rude style was exactly what a Democracy losing a war needed. After 1940, Hitler was the one absolutely hating Churchill's rude style.

Mickey Kaus says about what you'd expect him to say, but I suspect he's not wrong. Summary paragraph:

Luther Strange is Cantor II. Which House Republicans want to try out for the role of Cantor III by backing the Pelosi/Trump amnesty? Not many, I suspect. The pundits may tell them the Alabama race was all about vague anti-Establishment anger, or the failure to repeal Obamacare, or about “local dynamics.” Elected Republican legislators, with their careers on the line, know better.

What if this thing that seems to be Trump is bigger than Trump — a wave he figured out how to ride for a little while, but from which he can fall and which will roll on without him?

We kept trying to tell the Never Trumpers and the rabid leftist who want to make us into 'Trump Sycophants'... that Trump is the tool, the hammer, the symbol of our discontent.

It isn't Trump per se that is the wave...although without him to focus the force of the wave, we wouldn't have come so far.

We keep trying to tell them that it isn't Trump.

Now we are telling them.... and they'd better listen. If you destroy Trump (the man) you are NOT going to like what comes next. Be careful Democrats, liberals, never Trumpers....you may get your wish in taking down Trump. You can't kill the passion and ideas.

As for Roy's career being over, he is very much like Genny Churchill's boy who was totally hated by the Tory establishment in England in the 1930s

Sorry, but you really are misreading what happened to him after his removal from the Supreme Court, an action, by the way, that the overwhelming number of people polled supported.

It wasn't just "the establishment" that rejected him, he was rejected overwhelmingly by the Alabama voters. When he ran for Congress twice he was completely rejected by Republican primary voters.

You're trying to jam your "establishment vs. the people" perspective into something where it just doesn't fit. At least in the past. Maybe you're right on this occasion; I moved from Alabama several years ago and haven't kept up much on their politics.

Ambrose: If someone had told me a year ago that our MSM would be gleefully celebrating a Senate primary victory by Roy Moore - of all people, I would have thought they were crazy.

Yesterday my husband was remarking that, ten years ago, he could not have predicted or even imagined the issues that people are choosing to go crazy over now. I replied that I can't predict or even imagine which issues they'll be going crazy over next week.

Huh. Like Trump cares which guy has the job. He supported his friend, now he'll be fine with the new guy.I remember a quote of Rachel Maddow on election night, when she and all of them were sitting around puzzling about what was happening: But if this is an attack on the establishment, why are all these Republican incumbents keeping their seats?Yeah, because if I don't like what's happening in Washington, I'm going to vote for a Democrat. We voted for Trump and establishment Republicans because we figured that together they might be able to get something done. We were maybe half right.

Captured Man was not speaking literally about repeal, but he was serious. Sotra like DJT and that wall funded by them Mexicans. By the way, what Captured Man opposed, along with the other despised establisment types, was neither literal or serious repeal.

What if this thing that seems to be Trump is bigger than Trump — a wave he figured out how to ride for a little while, but from which he can fall and which will roll on without him? Or is the whole thing — whatever it is (anti-establishment fury?) — already played out? We can't have an endless string of characters like Trump and, now, Moore...

@Althouse, go look up "preference cascade." Here's the way Glenn Reynolds described it;

"In short, average people behave the way they think they ought to, even though that behavior might not reflect their own personal feelings. Given a sufficient "A-HA!" moment when they discover that their personal feelings are shared by a large portion of the population their behavioral may change dramatically." (from Quora)

"Trumpism" isn't due to Trump. He's the "A-HA" moment, when people realized that they aren't the only ones privately saying that enough is enough. It's not "this far but no farther -- it's a sea change where many things will in fact be rolled back. My own Congresswoman doesn't get it yet, but maybe now she will and Ryan will and McConnell will (one can hope).

MikeR nails it- Trump saved the Republican Senate majority, and probably kept the Republicans in the House from losing more seats than they did. Without Trump at the top of the ticket, you would have had not only President Clinton, but also 50 Democrats in the Senate minimum. This is the thing the NeverTrumpers don't seem to want to admit to themselves, and it is going to kill them next year if they don't get their act together.

People like Inga believe they are immune to the hatred of whites being generated and intensified, they are not. Taking a knee generated almost 500 comments last night. Let me simplify it for you: "Fuck Whitey" That is Obama's legacy.

First thing, all politics are local. Second part: McConnell has been weak-kneed and Sessions has been a big disappointment so far, so that Strange was dragging a heavy load to start with. Third: Merkel's drubbing in Germany is part of this same world-wide "revolution of the Deplorables" that took place in Alabama. Moore appears to be a fighter of the Trump school - perhaps wrong, but never in doubt. The recent failure of the Senate to accomplish anything with Obamacare just reinforces for me the need to clean house in the Congress. I honestly can't worry about the prospects in the next election because I think the Dems are even more divided (and irrational) than the Rs.

I find myself moving more toward the Steve Bannon school of thought daily - much to my astonishment. Maybe I am just getting old and cranky, or maybe I have been around long enough to understand what an absolute nightmare the professional politicians have created.

Ron Winkleheimer said...SMG is correct that at one point everyone thought that Moore's career in politics was over. That he was too far right to win, even in Alabama. But then, suddenly, pizza parlor owners are being harassed for theoretically not catering gay weddings, photographers and others are being sued and some state governments are persecuting people for not being sufficiently supportive of gays, transgenderism is being feted in the public square and being pushed on young children. Football players are refusing to stand for the national anthem. College students are rioting in black masks trying to stop conservatives from speaking. Etc, etc, etc.

Trump is a symptom. If he fails to fulfill his promises he will be replaced by someone else. The Tea Party tried to communicate the unrest of the populace in a p[olite] manner. It was used to raise money, and then destroyed.

That's very close to how I view it as well, Ron; well said. I'm less sanguine about the direction the more-populist base will take the party and the country (favoring a libertarian-conservative approach, myself) but it's nuts to me that people who are supposed to be political experts can't see the cause and effect relationship there: with repeated culture war losses and humiliations and after having their elected constituents repeatedly refuse to address issues they care about (or worse, blatantly lie during elections and insultingly reveal the lie once in office--immigration/"the wall", repeal & replace, trade deals, Ex/Im bank, etc) the base became fed up.

The NeverTrump crowd was largely dismissive of the Tea Party back then (I'm thinking specifically of Brooks and most of National Review, but also George Will and others) and an awful lot of Tea Party types--life long Republicans, most of them--noticed. The contempt the establishment expressed for Tea Party ideas and Tea Party-supported candidates was noticed, too. The establishment's trump card (sorry) was always "without us you populist Republicans just can't win, so we get to dictate the party's agenda (and will make it more pro-business, more pro-immigrant, more focused on top rate tax cuts, etc. than you want). That was clearly disproven in the minds of a hell of a lot of people when Trump won over the loud objections of a lot of the GOP establishment.

It's possible--probable, really--that the pro-Trump crowd is overestimating their strength and would accomplish more by trying harder to work with the establishment. It's true, though, that the establishment's continued refusal to work with the pro-Trump crowd ensures that headaches like Moore will keep happening, possibly to the detriment of Republicans as a party and almost certainly to the detriment of conservatism as a governing philosophy.

@ Steve Galbreath... Moore and Churchill were both hated by both voters of parties with total hatred. Nobody wanted a fighter. They wanted sweet loving lies that the politicians sold them for winning office so they could get the usual bribes. The similarity is the voters need for reality finally burst upon the voters and the rulers who then looked for the hated truth teller. But once 1945 elections arrived, they kicked the rude guy out and opted for Socialism. Moore's style also has an expiration date.

Jeezum Crow, If I were the Dems, that picture of that idiotic fool looking like a child playing cowboys and Indians would be everywhere. That idiot is going to cost us seats in the Senate where we should have gained them. What a fucking gift to the Democrats.

It's wise to listen to him, if you care about politics. The man has insights. Demonizing him is foolish. I'd suggest listening to him and refuting his ideas, if you don't like what he's saying. But, on the whole, he's more often right, than wrong.

Moore and Churchill were both hated by both voters of parties with total hatred. Nobody wanted a fighter.

Right, but Moore's rejection in the past was not simply one of the "Establishment" repudiating him; it was the rank and file Alabama voter/citizen. One cannot fit Moore's rejection in a "the Establishment vs. the people" conflict. This is the explanation that I don't accept.

I simply don't find the "bakers are forced to serve gay customers and that's why he won" type of explanation plausible. This was Alabama. There is no "liberal culture" imposing itself on voters. Not in Alabama.

The Left/media complex trying to play this as Trump's first defeat is hilarious. Trump supported Strange for whatever reason, but Moore is much more aligned with Trump's base than is Strange, and despite a huge difference in spending Moore crushed Strange.

The real lesson is that trump is not an aberration and did not create his supporters--they and their grievances were there before he came along and exist independent of whether he is around or not. But that wouldn't fit The Narrative.

If anything, Trump is a big winner--he supported the GOP establishment pick, even went to AL to campaign for him, and look what happened. Trump can now go to Ryan and McConnell and say they and their establishment backers need to wake up or move aside. They won't listen, of course, but it does give Trump the high ground, for now.

Oh, and btb, last Sunday's NFL games must have been worth at least 5% to Moore, maybe his whole margin. Not that Strange supports the people "taking the knee," but that sort of cultural assault pushes people in the radical direction, which in this case was toward Moore.

That would contradict The Narrative, so you won't read or hear anyone saying it for a while. Maybe if someone polls on it, you'll see that in a few days.

Fifth Avenue Trumpets are selective with their facts, Birkel. Half-truths can be lies. Seems to me Trumpets are the ones always whining and complaining about RINOs and the GOPe. How long will you guys cry about Mitch and Paul? The price of gas is too high.

jacksonjay said...Orrrrr....., Mitch got DJT elected by holding the line on Merrick Garland.

We do know that Cruz and Lee were Tea Party favs, right? Anti-Establisment types, right? Cruz and Lee who helped bring down Graham-Cassidy. We know what Captured Man can Cruz, right?

How quickly they forget.

Mitch holding the line on the Court definitely helped motivate the Republican base and probably resulted in a number of Republicans who didn't like Trump deciding to vote for him anyway in order to deny Hillary the Court appointment. You're right that Mitch should get credit for that.

I haven't forgotten that Cruz was the Tea Party guy. I also haven't forgotten that the GOP establishment fought against Cruz until very late in the primary--had they faced the reality that neither Jeb! nor Rubio had a shot earlier in the cycle and gotten behind Cruz I think it would have been a close one between Cruz and Trump--I'm honestly not sure if Cruz would have defeated Hillary but I sure would have been happy to see that race play out.

You're not wrong to point out that Cruz and the Tea Party types have made McConnell and Ryan's jobs harder. They're supposed to, though! It's my assertion that the highly-engaged portion of what is now the Republican base is more closely aligned with the Tea Party and/or Trump populism than they are with McConnell and the establishment. You're welcome to see that as a bad thing--I think there's a lot of potential harm in that, myself--but you can't pretend it's not true.

Saying "these troublemakers didn't play along with the establishment plan" misses the point--a lot of the base doesn't like the establishment plan and is making that as plain as possible.

Martin said...Oh, and btb, last Sunday's NFL games must have been worth at least 5% to Moore, maybe his whole margin. Not that Strange supports the people "taking the knee," but that sort of cultural assault pushes people in the radical direction, which in this case was toward Moore

What was McConnell announcing the defeat of the third (and last, under the current rules) Obamacare repeal and replace legislative effort on the day of (or maybe day before) the election worth? Couple-a points, I'd bet.

setting the stage for a worsening Republican civil war that could have profound effects on next year’s midterm elections and undermine Trump’s clout with his core voters

Oddly enough, Moore is a lot more like his core voters than the WaPo is giving credit for. These were the people Trump wooed and courted throughout last year. Then Trump fired the people who got him his win and hired his son-in-law and a whole list of other swamp-dwellers. I'm just hoping this gets through to Trump.

“It’s almost as if there is a compulsion in the party to nominate the most ‘out there’ candidate just to show you can, with no concern about what that means for the rest of the party,” [Charlie] Sykes said." Used to be, it was almost as if the GOPe just got the most milquetoast candidate with no regard for a chunk of the actual base and potential white working class voters. No more.

“Republicans — and that means Trump, too — have unleashed something they can’t control.” True, but it is really the GOPe that unleashed it. And even they didn't: voter circumstances and interests are what they are. The only thing that has changed is the chance to express them, on the right and the left.

In Europe, the fluidity and fragmentation takes the form of different parties rising to the fore. Here, the establishments within the two major parties have to face uprisings, mainly because it is still difficult for an independent third force to prevail.

I simply don't find the "bakers are forced to serve gay customers and that's why he won" type of explanation plausible. This was Alabama. There is no "liberal culture" imposing itself on voters. Not in Alabama.

Liberal culture is not imposing itself, it is being imposed, by actual people who appear to control society. People in Alabama see what's being presented in popular culture. They are probably aware that Teen Vogue has printed an article on the proper method for performing anal sex. They know that Bruce Jenner now wears a dress and is given awards for it. They've heard of the Hobby Lobby and Little Sisters of the Poor and their fight with the federal government. They most likely stood in long lines during Chik-Fil-A support day a few years ago.

We need a strong conservative pushback in this country and it is not being supplied by the Republican establishment at all it seems, nor by President Trump consistently either. Sure, some of the things Moore has done are embarrassing just as is the President. But we need something much more than Republicans seem able to provide if this nation is to be saved. Actually, we need Divine help in a very serious way. But Moore and Trump are a start.

Well said HoodlumDoodlum! I voted for Cruz in the Senate primary and the general in Texas. He was not going to beat Hillary. He is establishment to most Trumpers, even though he has made bitter enemies among them for standing firm. For now, obviously, Trump has the Congress that he has. Being the Master Persuader, he should get to persuading. Paul Ryan delivered for Trump and then Trump called their plan "mean-spirited." That was after he had them all over to the WH for a big celebration! What the Hell?

McCain is obviously just being an ass, but we already knew that about him. He is what he is. Rand Paul is an attention whore. We knew that about him. Facts is facts. Their efforts to buy-off the two ladies failed. Did DJT reach out to them? Sure didn't hear anything about him trying to persuade them. Maybe I missed it.

jacksonjay said...McCain is obviously just being an ass, but we already knew that about him. He is what he is. Rand Paul is an attention whore. We knew that about him. Facts is facts. Their efforts to buy-off the two ladies failed. Did DJT reach out to them? Sure didn't hear anything about him trying to persuade them. Maybe I missed it.

Sure, but I have to say given the type of President Trump is and will likely be it is hard to escape the conclusion that the blame for these early key legislative failures lies with the GOP legislative leadership.I've said it before but it's clear to me that Trump would have, and will, sign just about ANYTHING the GOP gets to his desk that can be claimed to advance a cause Trump has trumpeted. I just can't imagine Trump vetoing a Ryan-backed health care reform bill. I can't imagine Trump vetoing an immigration reform bill, no matter how amnesty-focused it is. The fact that the Republican legislative leadership was unable to get solid bills passed with their own party support--after YEARS of campaigning on all the great things they'd do if only they weren't facing a veto--is, in my mind, wholly their fault. I allow that Trump didn't HELP and that an engaged President stumping hard for well-defined bills/reform efforts would have made the leg. leaders' jobs easier, but the fact is that's not the kind of President Trump will be. McConnell owns his legislative agenda's failures, and the GOP leadership's seeming insistence on pursing an agenda contrary to what their most engaged and motivated base members want is a recipe for further inta-party problems.

Trump's to blame for a lot of the GOP's problems, but he's not to blame for the GOP legislative leadership not having their shit together and not being able to support all the claims they've been making (to GOP voters) for close to a decade now.

Steve M. Galbraith said...This is a type of nihilism by Trump supporters that I completely reject. The illiberal left and the illiberal right run things now.

Without completely disagreeing I'd say it's more like: the illiberal Left has been running things nationally for a while (and been in full control of key institutions like the Media and Academy) and the illiberal/populist Right finally got sick enough of losing with traditional center-right/establishment candidates that they've begun embracing their illiberal tendencies and voting accordingly.

More of a justification than an excuse, I'll admit, but the "reason why" seems important to keep straight, anyway.

I'll just add that most people polled agreed with Moore that the Ten Commandments display did not violate the Establishment Clause. But most said that Moore's decision to ignore higher court decisions that overruled his decision was wrong.

There are many liberal places in Alabama. Places that display rainbow flags and say ____ welcome here. Plenty. There's the Birmingham pledge, and even outside of Birmingham, there are similar things. Hopefully no one believes that liberal thought is foreign there. It's definitely not.

Brookzene said...Just in my worthless opinion there's a hubris stalking this movement and there's going to be hell to pay for it.

Probably. There was hubris a-plenty in the Left's declaration of "permanent Democratic majorities," in their vocal exultation of the end of the dominance of the old white American man, etc, in their spitefully joyous embrace of the "I won" and "pen & and phone" mentality/governing philosophy...and we got Trump.

Probably what comes after will also be unpleasant. But the world didn't begin yesterday, man.

Brookzene said...Brookzene said...You are using hubris but mean to use another word.

I don't think so at all. There are two other attendants to this movement, in addition to hubris, again imo. Self-righteousness and grievance.

Self-righteousness I'll leave aside as I'm not sure there's a way to say one political wing has more of that than the other (both are full to bursting with it), but grievance we should address.

You're not wrong that the Trump-populism you see from the right has a large and "ugly" grievance component. You're wrong to imply that this is something new, though: the Left has been motivated by the politics of grievance for most of my life and has damn mean built an industry around weaponized grievance as part of their identity politics. It's almost the only common thread between many of the Left's disparate groups--"intersectionality" for many of those groups really just means common grievance focal points and/or tactics.

You're correct to point out that the Trump-populist right is adopting grievance appeal tactics. You should acknowledge that in this they're just playing catch up to the Left's well-established, and unfortunately often-successful, pattern.

HoodlumDoodlum for instance makes a good argument that seems to have a lot of truth in it. But it seems to me there's a "next step" missing. I'm still thinking about it.

You're just annoying @Birkel. Not seeing that you have any ability to change someone's mind or explain something so someone will understand. You can troll me all you want but I'm not really interested in your thoughts.

Yes, especially around the universities. Even in southern Alabama there's a pretty strong libertarianish point of view. It's not all fundamentalist religious types; those tend to be up north.

I lived on the eastern shore - the Daphne/Fairhope part where we have many retired people who moved from the north or outside of the state. They're mostly Republicans but more moderate/liberal ones on social issues. And the "redneck Riviera" area around the Gulf Shores/Emerald Coast is certainly not a bastion of Bible believers. It's a bit more of a diverse state than people think.

It's also why I'm surprised that Moore won. At least by the margin he did.

You're correct to point out that the Trump-populist right is adopting grievance appeal tactics. You should acknowledge that in this they're just playing catch up to the Left's well-established, and unfortunately often-successful, pattern.

A lot of Trump voters motivation was voting against Hillary. Some Trump voters voted because of one promise or another. I voted against Hillary, for school choice, and hoping un-employed people would get back to work.Growing up, I knew people in "the projects" going to bad schools. I was unskilled and desperate for work at one point in my life. I can relate to those people. Now, I, and other Trump voters are all of a kind, according to our betters. All privileged white guys, all racists, sexists, Nazis, KKK etc. So, fuck you.This is Obama's legacy.

Moore's win does prove that the Trump supporters don't just mindlessly follow him.

Whether that's good or bad is another matter.

I am surprised at the margin of victory. Strange was a lousy candidate and Moore is certainly charismatic. But ideologically there's not much difference. Both will support Trump's agenda with no questions asked. So why Moore?

You're correct to point out that the Trump-populist right is adopting grievance appeal tactics.

The left set the rules. Its all identity politics all the time. The nation has degenerated to the point that only 1/3rd of Americans can identify the three branches of government. Most can't even tell you what one of the rights identified by the 1st amendment are. University students want to curtail free speech with which they disagree by calling it "hate speech." They further argue that use of force to curtail speech is not only justified, but moral. Its kinda hard to have Lincoln/Douglas debates when your opposition shows up with acid and baseball bats convinced that you are moral monsters who don't really merit a hearing. And don't have any idea what the hell Lincoln/Douglas debates means anyway.

That might work on a small minority, but not when the opposition is at least half the population and occupies most of the landmass of the country.

And the politicians simply refuse to address the concerns of at least half of the country. Or openly hope for them to die more quickly so that the government can adopt a more amenable electorate.

The situation is inherently unstable. Something had to give. And that is what is happening now.

You're correct to point out that the Trump-populist right is adopting grievance appeal tactics. You should acknowledge that in this they're just playing catch up to the Left's well-established, and unfortunately often-successful, pattern.

A lot of Trump voters motivation was voting against Hillary. Some Trump voters voted because of one promise or another. I voted against Hillary, for school choice, and hoping un-employed people would get back to work.Growing up, I knew people in "the projects" going to bad schools. I was unskilled and desperate for work at one point in my life. I can relate to those people.Now, I, and other Trump voters are all of a kind, according to our betters. All privileged white guys, all racists, sexists, Nazis, KKK etc. So, fuck you.This is Obama's legacy.

This is a pretty fascinating post. And I don't really have anything to say about it at the moment, other than I get this, and it's impressive. And you know I'm really not on board with it, but it's a pretty eloquent explanation.

What I confess I don't understand is why Hillary is so vehemently hated. I understand why she's not liked or desired but I don't get the visceral component, or the level of hatred. I'm missing something there, and probably a lot of people are. Or not: maybe my liberal friends can explain it to me.

It's also why I'm surprised that Moore won. At least by the margin he did.

A lot of people think Strange was appointed to the Senate seat by the then Gov to get him out of the state legislature and thus stopping a probe of wrong doing by the Gov. (I don't understand why anyone would want to be the governor of Alabama, its seems to be 50/50 odds that you'll end up in prison.) Add to that that Moore supporters are enthusiastic (fanatical) and so are going to show up to vote for their guy while Strange supporters were "meh" or actually just voting against Moore. And the commercials the Senate Leadership Fund ran were sooooooooo stupid. They showed no understanding of the state or the political situation. They tried to tar Moore as weak on the 2nd amendment, a career politician, and a fat cat feeding off the public trough. In the meantime they tried to portray "Big Luther" as such a man of the people that he cain't nohow comb all the hayseed out of his hair. And of course, the Senate Leadership Fund (Mitch McConnell) trying to buy the election pissed a lot of people off.

@Althouse, go look up "preference cascade." Here's the way Glenn Reynolds described it;

"In short, average people behave the way they think they ought to, even though that behavior might not reflect their own personal feelings. Given a sufficient "A-HA!" moment when they discover that their personal feelings are shared by a large portion of the population their behavioral may change dramatically." (from Quora)

"Trumpism" isn't due to Trump. He's the "A-HA" moment, when people realized that they aren't the only ones privately saying that enough is enough.

I would also like to point out that Moore won election to Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court several years after being suspended from the position the first time, and after losing bids for other offices. The voters of Alabama have changed their minds about him. His antics concerning the 10 Commandments statue and his defying federal law seem less comical now as magazines meant for 12-14 year old girls explain how to do anal sex correctly.

"If you've given up on the rule of law" You mean, like, SSM from the 14th Amendment, and pot approval in several states, and DACA, courts striking down temporary travel bans, and Hill email non-prosecution? It's wrong to "give up" on that "rule of law"?

Blogger HT said...There are many liberal places in Alabama. Places that display rainbow flags and say ____ welcome here. Plenty. There's the Birmingham pledge, and even outside of Birmingham, there are similar things. Hopefully no one believes that liberal thought is foreign there. It's definitely not.

Steve M. Galbraith said...So disobeying a lawful court order is wrong today?Yesterday you were all about Ross Parks.

Parks was a private citizen. Moore was an elected official who swore to uphold the law.

If one thinks it's okay for elected officials to ignore the Constitution and law then the complaints about Obama ignoring immigration laws and the Constitution with his DACA order are hollow.

No, Steve, Moore swore an oath to uphold the US Constitution.

The US Constitution does not contain a "right" to same sex marriage. Kennedy et al lying about that doesn't change that.

That aside, since the Left isn't willing to be bound by the written US Constitution, the rule of law, and democracy, what in the world makes you think the rest of us will consider ourselves bound, either?

HR people are just screws for the Executive Suite commissars and their MBA consultant NKVD. No HR person has ever been a help to a line employee. All they do is robotically recite lines given to them. That's about all their flatworm intelligence can handle.

What I confess I don't understand is why Hillary is so vehemently hated. I understand why she's not liked or desired but I don't get the visceral component, or the level of hatred. I'm missing something there, and probably a lot of people are. Or not: maybe my liberal friends can explain it to me.

Hillary is the personification of the "global elite". Arrogant, entitled, full of contempt, for her "lessers", and totally incompetent.

What, besides marrying Bill Clinton, looking the other way when he uses women like Kleenex, and viciously attacking any women who try to call Bill on his sexual harassment, has Hillary ever accomplished?

She was given a NY Senate Seat as payoff for backing Bill during Monica. She was in the Senate for 8 years. What did she accomplish there? Nothing.

She was SoS for 4 years. What did she accomplish, besides arranging for corrupt deals to benefit CFI and give US enemies access to classified data through her illegal email server?

She is a worthless pile of garbage held up as a paragon. As a rule, that really pisses people off.

Like the facts. I could continue on, but you will shut them out as soon as I start, then you will ask yourself again "What am I missing?"

Why don't you explain to us what the Clinton Foundation was, in your own words. Tell us how you see it. We could start there, as good a place as any. Why didn't it bother you that she took millions of dollars from Russia for it and parked political cronies there. I'm missing something there, probably a lot of people are.

Maybe you could explain to me why her destruction of not just emails, but records of meetings with people she met with as SoS who had also given her millions of dollars doesn't bother you. I'm missing something there, probably a lot of people are.

Maybe you can explain to me why it was OK for her to lie to the families who were there as their loved ones' bodies came home from Benghazi, and why she promised to throw an artist in jail for making art? I'm missing something there, probably a lot of people are.

Maybe you can explain to me why it was OK for her to exacerbate the civil war in Syria by sending in weapons in an attempt to overthrow the government of yet another ME state, when we had just had an election and soundly rejected that policy. I'm missing something there, probably a lot of people are.

Maybe you can explain why it didn't bother you when she guffawed "We came! We saw! He died!" after the war she whipped up against Libya (At the behest of Sydney Blumenthal, who was being paid 10K a month by the Clinton foundation. I'm missing something there, probably a lot of people are.

This doesn't even go back to her long history of destruction and hiding of evidence in legal disputes. Or her fantastical success at commodities trading, in which she and the lawyer for Tyson Chicken, which had a lot of business before the Governor, did some trades which might have been legal. Who knows. They each traded different sides in the commodities markets and he took all of the losers and wrote them off on his taxes, and she took all of the winners and cashed them in! It might have been legal, but we will never know since all of the paperwork which was legally supposed to have been kept on these trades were mysteriously lost. Why didn't that bother you? I am missing something there, probably a lot of people are.

I didn't even get into her attacks on the victims of her husband's predatory abuse of his power as Governor and President for sexual coercion, assault, and even rape. Why didn't that bother you? I am missing something there.

We've got a taste for the bizarre and we don't trust the appearance of normality anymore.

Clinton was the normal candidate. She had all the right connections — to Hollywood, to Silicon Valley, to Wall Street... And she had the vagina. Clinton's so goddamned normal she didn't even draft a concession speech.

Normality has gotten this land, this nation, this idea called the United States within sight of the Edge. There it is in front of us, and we're still running full tilt at empty space like Wile E. Coyote in thoughtless pursuit of the Roadrunner. 20 trillion in sovereign debt and five or six times as much in unfunded liabilities.

Why don't you try something to overcome your biases, why don't you imagine that it was Trump who had that much evidence arrayed against him, and ask yourself if you could find any way to conclude that he was not guilty of abusing his power as governor to rape a supporter? Not just rape her, but to completely dismiss her reason as a business owner and entrepreneur to meet him, and reduce her to a "pussy" to use his 6'4" frame to force himself on?

Why wouldn't it bother you to have that sexual predator once again on the loose, scouting for talent among the new interns, in the West Wing, with a private office, I am sure, probably soundproofed. Especially considering your constant blathering about sexist treatment of women here, which is all for show, it would seem. I'm missing something there, probably a lot of people are.

Will Cate said...Ann said: "The revenge of Sarah Palin. She really started it all, didn't she?"

I totally think so -- been saying this for years. And when the DNC and the media systematically set out to destroy her in 2008, that was the spark that lit the current "populist" wave upon which Trump currently surfs.

If there were up and down vote buttons I wouldn't have to comment as often.

What I confess I don't understand is why Hillary is so vehemently hated. I understand why she's not liked or desired but I don't get the visceral component, or the level of hatred. I'm missing something there, and probably a lot of people are. Or not: maybe my liberal friends can explain it to me.

I had a TS/SCI clearance. There are people who went to jail for having 6 pictures on a personal laptop in places they weren't supposed to take pictures. They didn't even distribute them. Years in jail.

Clinton destroyed over 30,000 emails. She had SAP material on her server. She distributed information to people without proper clearance with intent. Any of us would be in jail for life if we did what she did.

She was the epitome of protected aristocracy. Her supporters would have been happy to absolve her of her crimes and throw me in jail. She is a living and breathing affront to justice and equal treatment under the law. Her election would have meant the end of the rule of law.

Hope that clears it up a little. Not even going to get into all the dead people or the obvious corruption.

When an HR person comes to our quarterly meetings, they're regarded with fear and loathing. Decent people look at them like they're a disgusting, stinking mess left on the sidewalk.

They're the sort of swine that would force everyone to go to a three-day Diversity training course where they're harangued by some otherwise-unemployable SJW consultant. Not that it's for the benefit of the employees themselves, just protecting the Executive masters they're little yapping dogs for.

tim in vermont said...I'm missing something there, and probably a lot of people are.

Like the facts. I could continue on, but you will shut them out as soon as I start, then you will ask yourself again "What am I missing?"

Yes, let's take this at face value.

Brookzene, if you have not even been made aware of at least some of the grievances by Right-thinking people against Hillary Clinton, some of which have been festering for over 25 years, some quite fresh, either that's:

your fault, for willful ignorance, denial, or sheer mendacity;

or the fault of the media you consume, for concealing or misleading you.

WisRich said...“It’s almost as if there is a compulsion in the party to nominate the most ‘out there’ candidate just to show you can, with no concern about what that means for the rest of the party,” [Charlie] Sykes said.

No Charlie, the electorate is purging the RINO's.

What a lot of bullshit! "Republican in name only"? There is absolutely no one in the modern history of Presidential politics to whom the acronym RINO is better applied, than former Democrat, former Reform Party fan, critic of Republican "donors," and all-around pain in the ass to most Republicans in Washington and in state houses all across the country, than Donald J. Trump.

Steve Bannon, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and much of "conservative" talk radio are all seemingly no longer interested in "conservatism" at all. Rush Limbaugh himself that Trumpism is all about simply being anti-liberal. And they are all making careers out of attacking the Republican Party.

Stop with the "RINO" nonsense. Go form a new party, which is what Bannon seems to want no matter what. A new, nationalist, white, working-class party.

All Trump wants is good press, so then his favorable tweets about Candidate Strange were quickly deleted when Moore won. But why did the Trump ego decide that he needed to support a Republican candidate? Likely, he never investigated the preference of the populists now voting as Republicans.

Additionally, if he had bothered to check, Trump would have discovered that his attacks on the NFL should have been handled in another way. As Tyler Cohen reports, Congress has been doling out millions of dollars to the NFL to promote flag patriotism but prior to 2009, teams did not file onto the field until after the national anthem had been sung.

So the Democrats and Prez Zero are responsible for this non-issue. Can we shut this stupidity down now?

Chuck, no one is asking your permission or advice. I don't mean this as a dig.

The Party is no longer yours.

We have taken it away from you.

If you want a party of people who will pretend to oppose the left but not really, it is you who will have to go off to the wilderness and make a new one. I believe "Whigs" is free at present. "Fags" is also available.

You said Haha, F You, primary us if you dare.

That's one, Strange. Two counting Cantor. That's what comes to mind, I could have missed others. There will be more.

You're not in charge here anymore.

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy, but that's neither here nor there. You have lost and it is you who will submit or be destroyed, not we.

The term RINO does not apply to Charlie Sykes. He's GOPe. The GOPe is what the GOP is. They are in bed with the Dems and not "in name only."

That's why Trump won and that's why Moore won and I pray that that's why the corrupt GOPe continues to pour money down the rat hole for their Establishment pets - who will then lose to candidates who represent the people and not the DC shitbags.

I had a TS/SCI clearance. There are people who went to jail for having 6 pictures on a personal laptop in places they weren't supposed to take pictures. They didn't even distribute them. Years in jail.

Clinton destroyed over 30,000 emails. She had SAP material on her server. She distributed information to people without proper clearance with intent. Any of us would be in jail for life if we did what she did.

She was the epitome of protected aristocracy. Her supporters would have been happy to absolve her of her crimes and throw me in jail. She is a living and breathing affront to justice and equal treatment under the law. Her election would have meant the end of the rule of law.

Hope that clears it up a little. Not even going to get into all the dead people or the obvious corruption.

Brookzene said...

Heh. I may not know a lot of stuff but I know you don't hate her because she killed people, you believe she killed people because you hate her.

File that under the usual explanations that don't explain the phenomenon to me. But please though, if you want to continue believing that go ahead, let's not argue.

Uh, you kind of skipped over the whole security breach thing there, Brook. Talking to a lib friend who used to have a sense of humor. Puts me on defensive because Trump hung out with Roy Cohn. She knew nothing of Cohn before reading Huffington and getting talking points. I says Cohn a homo when homo wasn't cool. "Oh, Trump didn't know he was gay". Sure, Cohn his best friend and mentor and everybody in New York bur Trump knew he was gay.Then, she gets into the apartment discrimination lawsuit. Says I, Trump fought the community to get gays and blacks admitted to Mar Lago. "I didn't know that, I will have to check"

Same as Brook, latch on to the as yet unproven murder connection, ignore the in your face obvious intel breach.

You primaried Paul Ryan and lost. And John McCain, and lost. And Marco Rubio, and lost.

When your wing dubiously won primaries with Sharron Angle, Christine O'Donnell and Todd Akin, they all got killed in their general elections.

I really think that the goal of the Limbugh/Hannity wing of whatever it is that you are, is to be a permanent minority party, griping and grousing about the evils of liberal government. That's good business for them.

Running a bunch of Palins/Akins/O'Donnells/Angles/Moores in swing districts and swing states across the nation will hand Congress back to the Dems.

Chuck saysWhat a lot of bullshit! "Republican in name only"? There is absolutely no one in the modern history of Presidential politics to whom the acronym RINO is better applied, than former Democrat, former Reform Party fan, critic of Republican "donors," and all-around pain in the ass to most Republicans in Washington and in state houses all across the country, than Donald J. Trump

You voted for Trump. No matter your excuse, you are a Nazi, KuKluxKlanner, racist, misogynist, sexist,old, white and privileged as well as a no good titty twister deplorable.

Chuck: I really think that the goal of the Limbugh/Hannity wing of whatever it is that you are, is to be a permanent minority party, griping and grousing about the evils of liberal government. That's good business for them.

As opposed to the goal of the cuckservative wing of the Uniparty, which is to carry on as if it is the minority party, regardless of the actual number of seats held, griping and grousing about the evils of liberal government when the sinecures are in peril, but otherwise assiduously supporting the agenda of the Dem wing of the Uniparty. That's always been damned good business.

Yes. If those names stick, as they have for Rocket Man, Crooked Hillary, Little Marco etc etc etc. Once you have been "named" or labeled it is really hard to reverse that label.

This is what the left has done and is trying to do with wide swaths of people. Label people to assign negative qualities to them that stick. White people are racist is one of the latest. Conservatives are KKK or Nazi members. Homophobes. Islamophobes Etc. Doesn't matter if it is true as long as it sticks.

Most people are skeptical of labeling all others as a group or resent being labeled or painted with a broad brush.

The fact that Trump's nicknames can be humorous at the same time as conveying some negative aspects is what makes the name stick. Funny and sort of true if not completely true.

Trump is just taking a page from the liberals and it is working.

So Yeah. Rocket Man works because it is funny and it got the attention of the world including the little turd that the name is now attached to.

Heh. I may not know a lot of stuff but I know you don't hate her because she killed people, you believe she killed people because you hate her.

File that under the usual explanations that don't explain the phenomenon to me.

Ha ha ha! Who said they hated her because she killed people? Out of all of the reasons we listed which had to do with malfeasance, betrayal of her putative "feminism," influence peddling to the tune of hundreds of millions of. dollars personally, from nothing, and her exploitation of her position of SoS for financial gain and her lying, none of that strikes you as legitimate reasons to detest her?

LOL, do. we get to decide why you hate Trump now? It's because his alpha male personality makes your scrotum shrink is my bet. I don't care what comes out of your mouth, you are suffering from a "false consciousness" It's the scrotum thing, definitely .

If you refuse to listen, then it's going to be a mystery 'til you die.

Since you won't listen to us, why don't we start with what you believe about her? Why don't you explain why she took all of that money from Putin cronies? It's a mystery to us how anybody who doesn't expect to gain financially, could. support her above any other Democrat other than David Duke.

Imagine, if you will, that Steve Bannon had taken millions from the Russians, as Hillary is documented to have done by the New York Times, then he had deleted 30K emails, some of which would have documented communication with those same Russian (as Hillary's would have) then, further, and against Federal law, he had destroyed records of those same meetings in State Department burn bags, would you detest him.

But here is more malfeasance. How much do you need to start questioning if she should have been your nominee?

Hillary Clinton’s closest aide revealed in a deposition last week that her boss destroyed at least some of her schedules as secretary of state — a revelation that could complicate matters for the presumptive Democratic nominee, who, along with the State Department she ran, is facing numerous lawsuits seeking those public records.

Huma Abedin was deposed in connection with a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit into Clinton’s emails — but her admission could be relevant to another lawsuit seeking Clinton’s schedules.

“If there was a schedule that was created that was her Secretary of State daily schedule, and a copy of that was then put in the burn bag, that . . . that certainly happened on . . . on more than one occasion,” Abedin told lawyers

I spent eight years at the State Department and watched as four US ambassadors and two secretaries of state shared their daily schedules with a variety of State Department employees and US officials,” said Richard Grenell, former diplomat and US spokesman at the United Nations.

Modal TriggerHuma AbedinAP“I’ve never seen anyone put their schedule in the burn bag — because every one of them had a state.gov email address and therefore their daily schedules became public records, as required by law.”

Remember those federal records that she illegally destroyed were quite possibly records of meetings with the Russians who gave her millions, or other foreign persons who funneled money to the Clinton Foundation and paid her husband and herself for speeches.

Imagine if it were Bannon... You can't can you. That's why it will remain a mystery to you why people detest her.